CHAPTER VII. 1748-1771. Lawsuit, Legislation fixing Clergyman's right to Glebes-State of the Clergy-Substitution of Money for Tobacco in paying Clergy-Difficulties thence arising-Injustice to Clergy-Appearance of Baptists-Their bitter Enmity-Great Question of the legality of paying the Clergy in Money-Suit to settle it-Mr. Henry, his first Appearance—Question settled against the Clergy-Efforts in Virginia to obtain the Episcopate -Opposed by some of the Clergy-Their Conduct approved by the Legislature. ALLUSION has already been made on a previous page of this narrative, to the uncertain tenure by which the clergy held their livings; and the year on which we are now entering afforded a striking practical illustration of the evils resulting from the existing system. It will be remembered that under the act of 1727, "every minister, received into any parish by the vestry," was entitled to demand the salary fixed by law of sixteen thousand pounds of tobacco. After the passage of this law, the usual mode of proceeding to supply a vacant parish was, as has been stated, to receive some clergyman recommended by the governor and commissary, and under such reception the clergyman claimed the profits of the parish. It seems that by direction of the vestry of Lunenburg parish in Richmond county, an individual entered upon the glebe lands contrary to the wishes of the incumbent, the reverend Mr. Kay. Mr. Kay brought an action of trespass against the intruder, and in 1748 the suit came before the general court for judgment, upon the single point whether the bare reception of a minister by the vestry, under the act of 1727, there having been no formal induction in the case, would enable the minister to maintain an action of trespass against one who entered on the glebe lands by order of the vestry. Judgment was finally rendered for Mr. Kay on this point, but it was by a divided court; and as the matter created much unpleasant excitement throughout the colony, the assembly, then in session, to prevent a prejudice against religion by the recurrence of a similar difficulty, enacted, that "every minister received into a parish is entitled to all the spiritual and temporal benefits of it, and may maintain an action of trespass against any person or persons who shall disturb him in the possession and enjoyment thereof."* This, it is believed, is the first act of legislation which secured the clergyman against the exercise of that caprice in a vestry which might, by petty annoyance, lead to a removal from his charge; but it certainly was not intended to prevent the removal of an unworthy incumbent, against whom a direct accusation of improper conduct could be preferred; nor should it have had in its operation the effect of giving impunity to the wicked and the worthless. It was therefore a wholesome enactment, and it is only to be lamented that it was not of earlier date; had it been, the church in Virginia would probably have enrolled in its ministry more men worthy of the sacred office; but as it was, it came too late to remedy an evil which for years had been operating to prevent the best men from seeking clerical employment in the colony. If the authority of a contemporary who laboured long and faithfully in Virginia may be relied on, much the larger part of the clergy were at this time deficient in the great duty of placing distinctly before the people the fundamental truths of the Gospel. Most of them might, indeed, have led lives externally decent, at any rate they are not charged with any flagrant * Bland's Letter to the Clergy of Virginia. violations of propriety in their outward deportment; but nothing was more common, as we gather from the writer to whom we are indebted for these facts, than to be confronted, when he enjoined a duty or condemned a sin, with the inquiry, "Why did not other ministers tell us so? were they not as wise as you?" Nay, from some of the clergy themselves he was compelled to endure opposition and reproach; and opprobrious epithets, calculated to alarm prejudice or provoke ridicule, were freely resorted to, to destroy or diminish the effects of his ministry.* With such priests, it is easy to believe what is recorded of the people. "The Sabbath day was usually spent by them in sporting," and no question seems to have been made whether the practice was right or wrong. And with such a people, it is not probable that the errors and vices of their teachers formed the subject of very serious complaints, or that direct efforts were made often to displace an unworthy clergyman. The act, therefore, which has just been recited, it may well be supposed, under all the circumstances, served as much to impart confidence to wickedness, as to afford security to virtue. No wonder is it that the church languished, while dissenters acquired strength at her expense. She was not true to herself. The devout use of her formularies, the faithful preaching of her doctrines, the consistent piety of her clergy, would have presented more effectual checks to the growth of dissent than any exertion of civil authority; these, under God, are at all times her best bulwarks, for these remove all grounds of reasonable complaint; and the absence of these can never be supplied by the mere support of the arm of civil power. In the year 1755, a petition was preferred to the legislature by the clergy themselves, which furnishes evidence The Life of the Rev. Devereux Jarrat, 28, 86. ↑ Ibid, 28. that the picture here presented of that body is not exaggerated. The petition sets forth "that the salary appointed by law for the clergy is so scanty, that it is with difficulty they support themselves and families, and can by no means make any provision for their widows and children, who are generally left to the charity of their friends; that the small encouragement given to clergymen is a reason why so few come into this colony from the two universities; and that so many who are a disgrace to the ministry find opportunities to fill the parishes; and that the raising of the salary would prove of great service to the colony," and the petitioners prayed accordingly that their salaries might be increased. The petition was not granted by the House of Burgesses; but it is due to that body to state, that the country was then engaged in an expensive war with the French, which called for an unusual taxation of the people. The representations here made of the character of many of the clergy are sustained by other statements concerning them which have come down to us. In a letter from Dr. Rundle, bishop of Derry, written in 1740, he speaks of three ministers whom he had discarded from his diocess, and to whom he had refused certificates, and yet, he adds, they "have obtained good livings in America." * The year 1757 was one of unparalleled distress in the colony the war just alluded to had not terminated; and to increase the privations consequent upon a state of hostility, there was a failure in the great staple of the country. There was not a sufficiency of tobacco made in the whole colony to have afforded to every man who was tithable two hundred pounds, out of which to pay his taxes. So great was the scarcity, that the assembly was obliged to issue money from the public funds to save the population from starving. In this emergency, the legislature enacted, that inasmuch as payment in tobacco was impossible, the * Bland's Letter to Virginia Clergy. clergy should receive "a price for their salaries, equal to crop tobacco at eighteen shillings per hundred weight," which gave to them for that year one hundred and fortyfour pounds, a salary larger than they had ever received before. There, probably, was tobacco enough to have paid the clergy alone, and the scarcity in the commodity had of course so much enhanced its value at the time, that had payment been made in the article itself, its sale would have yielded to its owners very large returns. Whether this consideration operated on the minds of the clergy to produce discontent is unknown; certain it is, however, that the law occasioned much murmuring, and the clergy contended that it was a violation of their rights to compel them to yield to this plan of substitution. A portion of them was not content patiently to submit; accordingly they met in convention at the college, and instructed the Rev. Mr. Camm (who was then the commissary) to make a representation on the subject to the Bishop of London, or to the Lords of Trade. It is probable that their complaint was made to their diocesan, as there is extant a letter from that prelate to the Board of Trade, in which he inveighs against this law as being subversive of the rights of the clergy.† On the contested point, it will probably, at this day, be conceded that the clergy were in the right; and as the matter in its consequences was one of much moment to the church, it demands attention. The act of 1757 was not the first law which had compelled the clergy to receive money in lieu of tobacco. In 1755, the crop having failed, the legislature passed "an act to enable the inhabitants of the colony to discharge their tobacco debts in money for the present year:" by this act, payments to be made in tobacco might be satisfied in money, at the rate of sixteen shillings and eight pence per hundred weight, at the option * Bland's Letter to Virginia Clergy. t Ibid. |